Transcriptional regulation in cells is a complex biological process. One basic principle is regulation by posttranslational modification of histone proteins, namely histone proteins H2A/B, H3 and H4 forming the octameric histone core complex. These complex N-terminal modifications at lysine residues by acetylation or methylation and at serine residues by phosphorylation constitute part of the so called “histone code” (Strahi & Ellis, Nature 403, 41-45, 2000). In a simple model, acetylation of positively charged lysine residues decreases affinity to negatively charged DNA, which now becomes accessible for the entry of transcription factors.
Histone acetylation and deacetylation is catalysed by histone acetyltransferases (HATs) and histone deacetylases (HDACs). HDACs are associated with transcriptional repressor complexes, switching chromatin to a transcriptionally inactive, silent structure (Marks at al. Nature Cancer Rev 1, 194-202, 2001). The opposite holds true for HATs which are associated with transcriptional activator complexes. Three different classes of HDACs have been described so far, namely class I (HDAC 1-3, 8) with Mr=42-55 kDa primarily located in the nucleus and sensitive towards inhibition by Trichostatin A (TSA), class II (HDAC 4-7, 9, 10) with Mr=120-130 kDa and TSA sensitivity and class III (Sir2 homologues) which are quite distinct by their NAD+ dependency and ISA insensitivity (Ruijter at al. Biochem. J. 370, 737-749, 2003; Khochbin at al. Curr Opin Gen Dev II, 162-166, 2001; Verdin at al. Trends Gen 19, 286-293, 2003), HDAC 11 with Mr=39 kDa was cloned recently and displayed homology to class I and II family members (Gao at al. J Biol Chem 277, 25748-25755, 2002). HATs and HDACs exist in large complexes together with transcription factor and platform proteins in cells (Fischle et al. Mol Cell 9, 45-47, 2002). Surprisingly, only about 2% of all genes are regulated by histone acetylation (von Lint et al. Gene Expression 5, 245-253, 1996). New studies with SAHA in multiple myeloma cells showed that these transcriptional changes can be grouped into distinct functional gene classes important for eg regulation of apoptosis or proliferation (Mitsiades at al. Proc Natl Aoad Sci 101, pp 540, 2004). Substrates different to histone proteins exist. For HDACs these include transcription factors like p53 and TFII E/or chaperones like Hsp90 (Johnstone & Licht, Cancer Cell 4, 13-18, 2003). Therefore the correct name for HDACs would be lysine-specific protein deacetylases. As a consequence of these findings, inhibitors of HDACs effect not only chromatin structure and gone transcription but also protein function and stability by regulating protein acetylation in general. This function of HDACs in protein acetylation might also be important for understanding of immediate gene repression by treatment with HDis (von Lint et al. Gene Expression 5, 245-253, 1996). In this regard, proteins involved in oncogenic transformation and malignant cell growth are of particular importance.
Different publications highlight the importance of histone acetylation for cancer development (reviewed by Kramer et al. Trends Endocrin Metabol 12, 294-300, 2001; Marks et al. Nature Cancer Rev 1, 194-202, 2001). These diseases include                (i) mutations of the HAT CAMP response element binding protein (COP) associated with Rubinstein-Taybi syndrome, a cancer predisposition (Murata et al. Hum Mol Genet 10, 1071-1076, 2001),        (ii) aberrant recruitment of HDAC1 activity by transcription factors in acute promyelocytic leukemia (APL) by the PML-retinoic acid receptor cc fusion gene (He et al. Nat genet 18, 126-135, 1998)        (iii) aberrant recruitment of HDAC activity by the overexpressed BCL6 protein in non-Hodgkins lymphoma (Dhordain et al. Nucleic Acid Res 26, 4645-4651, 1998) and finally        (iv) aberrant recruitment of HDAC activity by the AML-ETO fusion protein in acute myelogenous leukemia (AML M2 subtype; Wang et al. Proc Natl Aced Sci USA 95, 10860-10865, 1998). In this AML subtype, the recruitment of HDAC1 activity causally leads to gene silencing, a differentiation block and oncogenic transformation.        (v) HDAC1 gene knock-out in mice showed that HDAC1 has a profound function in embryonal stem cell proliferation by repressing cyclin-dependent kinase inhibitors p21waf1 and p27klp1 (Lagger et al. Embo J. 21, 2672-2681, 2002). Since p21waf1 is induced by HDIs in many cancer cell lines, HDAC1 might be a crucial component in cancer cell proliferation as well. Initial siRNA based gene-knock down experiments in HeLa cells support this hypothesis (Glaser et al. 310, 529-536, 2003)        (vi) HDAC2 is overexpressed in colon carcinoma upon constitutive activation of the wnt/β-catenin/TOF signalling pathay by loss of functional adenomatosis polyposis coil (APC) protein as reported by Zhu et al. recently (Cancer Cell 5, 455-463, 2004)        
On the molecular level, a pleithora of published data with various HDAC inhibitors like Trichostatin A (TSA) showed that many cancer relevant genes are up- or down regulated. These include p21CIP1, Cyclin E, transforming growth factor β (TGFβ), p53 or the von Hippel-Lindau (VHL) tumor suppressor genes, which are upregulated, whereas Bcl-XL, bcl2, hypoxia inducible factor (HIF) 1α, vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) and cyclin A/D are down-regulated by HDAC inhibition (reviewed by Kramer et al. Trends Endocrin Metabol 12, 294-300, 2001). HDAC inhibitors arrest cells at G1 and G2/M within the cell cycle and deplete S-phase cells, as shown for Depsipeptide as an example (Sander et al., British J Cancer 83, 817-825, 2000). HDAC inhibitory compounds induce p53 and caspase3/8 independent apoptosis and have broad anti-tumor activity. Anti-angiogenic activity was described also, which might be related to down-regulation of VEGF and HIF1α. In summary, HDAC inhibition effects tumor cells at different molecular levels and multiple cellular proteins are targeted.
Interestingly, HDAC inhibitors were found to induce cellular differentiation and this pharmacological activity might contribute to their anti-cancer activity as well. For example it was shown recently that suberoylanilide hydroxamic acid (SAHA) induces differentiation of breast cancer cell lines, exemplified by resynthesis of milk fat membrane globule protein (MFMG), milk fat globule protein and lipid (Munster et al. Cancer Res. 61, 8492, 2001).
There is growing rational for synergism of HDAC inhibitors with chemotherapeutic as well as target specific cancer drugs. For example, synergism was shown for SAHA with the kinase/cdk inhibitor flavopiridol (Alemenara at al. Leukemia 16, 1331-1343, 2002), for LAQ-824 with the bcr-abl kinase inhibitor Glivec in CML cells (Nimmanapaili at al. Cancer Ras. 63, 5126-5135, 2003) and for SAHA and Trichostatin A (TSA) with etoposide (VP16), cisplatin and doxorubicin (Kim at al. Cancer Res. 63, 7291-7300, 2003) and LBH589 with the hsp90 inhibitor 17-allyl-amino-demethoxy-geldanamycin (17-AAG; George at al. Blood online, Oct. 28, 2004). Also it was shown that HDAC inhibition causes reexpression of estrogen or androgen receptors in breast and prostate cancer cells with the potential to resensitize these tumors to anti-hormone therapy (Yang at al. Cancer Res. 60, 6890-6894, 2000; Nakayama et al. Lab Invest 80, 1789-1796, 2000).
HDAC inhibitors from various chemical classes were described in the literature with four most important classes, namely (i) hydroxamic acid analogs, (ii) benzamide analogs, (iii) cyclic peptides/peptolides and (iv) fatty acid analogs. A comprehensive summary of known HDAC inhibitors was published recently (Miller at al. J Med Chem 46, 5097-5116, 2003). There is only limited data published regarding specificity of these histone deacetylase inhibitors. In general most hydroxamate based HDI are not specific regarding class I and II HDAG enzymes. For example. TSA inhibits HDACs 1, 3, 4, 6 and 10 with ICK, values around 20 nM, whereas HDAC8 was inhibited with IC50=0.49 μM (Tatamiya at al, AACR Annual Meeting 2004, Abstract #2451). But there are exceptions like the experimental HDI Tubacin, selective for the class II enzyme HDAC 6 (Haggerty at al. Proc natl Aced Sci USA 100, 4389-4394, 2003). In addition, data on class I selectivity of benzamid HDIs are emerging. MS-275 Inhibited class I HDAC1 and 3 with IC50=0.51 μM and 1.7 μM, respectively. In contrast class II HDACs 4, 6, 8 and 10 were inhibited with IC50 values of >100 μM, >100 μM, 82.5 μM and 94.7 μM, respectively (Tatamiya at al, AACR Annual Meeting 2004, Abstract #2451). So far it is not clear if specificity towards HDAC class I or II enzymes or a defined single isoenzyme should be superior regarding therapeutic efficacy and index.
Clinical studies in cancer with HDAC inhibitors are on-going, namely with SAHA (Merck Inc.), Valproic acid, FK228/Depsipeptide (Gloucester Pharmaceuticals/NCI), MS275 (Berlex-Schering), NVP LBH-589 (Novartis), PXD-101 (Topotarget/Curagen), MGCD0103 (methylgene Inc.) and Pivalayloxymethylbutyrate/Pivanex (Titan Pharmaceuticals). These studies showed first evidence of clinical efficacy, highlighted recently by partial and complete responses with FK228/Depsipeptide in patients with peripheral T-cell lymphoma (Plekarz et al. Blood, 98, 2865-2868, 2001).
Recent publications also showed possible medical use of HDAC inhibitors in disease different to cancer. These diseases include systemic lupus erythematosus (Mishra et al. J Clin Invest 111, 539-552, 2003; Reilly et al. J. Immunol. 173, 4171-4178, 2004), rheumatoid arthritis (Chung et al. Mol Therapy 8, 707-717, 2003; Nishida et al. Arthritis & Rheumatology 60, 3365-3376, 2004), inflammatory diseases (Leoni et al. Proc Natl Aced Sd USA 99, 2995-3000, 2002) and neurodegenerative diseases like Huntington's disease (Steffan et al. Nature 413, 739-743, 2001, Hockly et al. Proc Natl Aced Sci USA 100(4):2041-6, 2003).
Cancer chemotherapy was established based on the concept that cancer cells with uncontrolled proliferation and a high proportion of cells in mitosis are killed preferentially. Standard cancer chemotherapeutic drugs finally kill cancer cells upon induction of programmed cell death (“apoptosis”) by targeting basic cellular processes and molecules, namely RNA/DNA (alkylating and carbamoylating agents, platin analogs and topoisomerase inhibitors), metabolism (drugs of this class are named anti-metabolites) as well as the mitotic spindle apparatus (stabilizing and destabilizing tubulin inhibitors). Inhibitors of histone deacetylases (HDIs) constitute a new class of anti cancer drugs with differentiation and apoptosis inducing activity. By targeting histone deacetylases, HDIs effect histone (protein) acetylation and chromatin structure, inducing a complex transcriptional reprogramming, exemplified by reactivation of tumor suppressor genes and repression of oncogenes. Beside effecting acetylation of N-terminal lysine residues in core histone proteins, non-histone targets important for cancer cell biology like heat-shock-protein 90 (Hsp90) or the p53 tumor suppressor protein exist. The medical use of HDIs might not be restricted to cancer therapy, since efficacy in models for inflammatory diseases, rheumatoid arthritis and neurodegeneration was shown.
Prior Art
Benzoyl or acetyl substituted pyrrolyl propenamides are described in the public literature as HDAC-inhibitors, whereas the connectivity of the acyl-group is at position 2 or 3 of the pyrrole scaffold. (Mai et. al., Journal Med. Chem. 2004, Vol. 47, No, 5, 1098-1109). Further pyrrolyl substituted hydroxamic acid derivatives are described in U.S. Pat. No. 4,960,787 as lipoxygenase inhibitors or in U.S. Pat. No. 6,432,999 as cyclooxygenase inhibitors.
Various compounds, which are said to be HDAC inhibitors, are reported in WO 01/38322; Journal Med. Chem. 2003, Vol. 46, No, 24, 5097-5116; Journal Med. Chem. 2003, Vol. 46, No. 4, 512-524; Journal Med. Chem. 2003, Vol, 46, No. 5, 820-830; and in Current Opinion Drug Discovery 2002, Vol, 5, 487-499. There remains a need in the art for new, well tolerated and more efficacious inhibitors of HDACs.